An experiment in socialism

Originally posted by Maslo

I dont think its a crass remark, its the core of the issue you seem to ignore. The redistribution of wealth is justified by the fact that people still need money to acquire basic necessities. If it wasnt the case (such as with stars and flags), then redistribution would not be justified. But it is the case.

If people need money for necessities, either give them your money or have them work. Don't steal from me and call it charity.

Redistribution is THEFT!

reply to post by Skyfloating

As opposed to capitalist countries where things are falling apart?

I take it you haven't looked at Detroit lately. Or New Orleans. Or out your front door.

The US is falling apart because of decades of deferred maintenance, because capitalists refused to pay the upkeep on the infrastructure. It didn't stop them from collecting taxes for them though: I've been paying a surcharge, that is, a tax, directly to my power company for as long as I can remember for undergrounding the utility lines that are still overhead these many, many years later. Same goes for gas taxes. They just don't want to spend it on what it is supposed to go for: I call that theft and fraud, or fraud and theft, you pick.

Crappy infrastructure isn't a socialist exclusive.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Maslo

I dont think its a crass remark, its the core of the issue you seem to ignore. The redistribution of wealth is justified by the fact that people still need money to acquire basic necessities. If it wasnt the case (such as with stars and flags), then redistribution would not be justified. But it is the case.

If people need money for necessities, either give them your money or have them work. Don't steal from me and call it charity.

Redistribution is THEFT!

Its not always possible to find work, especially in this economy.

And what exactly is wrong with theft, when its used to acquire basic necessities?

Originally posted by apacheman
I take it you haven't looked at Detroit lately.

Detroit has had the highest percentage of left-wing voters in the whole country for awhile now. Thanks for citing that example.

Who gives a S**T about stars and flags. R u kidding me. Only PU**Y minded member would a give a hoot.

reply to post by apacheman

Cities are crumbling because people don't care. It's not theirs. There is no ownership anymore. It's governments' problem. Government gets involved, creates a problem, then the same government comes in with a solution.
Earning, working, owning instills pride in something.

Government redistribution takes away pride in success.

I'm not sure where the assumption comes from that socialists dont want to work. The socialist movements was originally started by the workers. Those people that mined the resources and built the infrastructures, that allowed the capitalists to operate and attain wealth.

Originally posted by Maslo

Its not always possible to find work, especially in this economy.

And what exactly is wrong with theft, when its used to acquire basic necessities?

If you're on the receiving end of theft and have no pride, then nothing is wrong with theft.

I'll let your post stand by iself to define you and your values.

Originally posted by dilly1
Who gives a S**T about stars and flags. R u kidding me. Only PU**Y minded member would a give a hoot.

It is something that is earned through work.

Just having to explain THAT says much about your post.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
I'm not sure where the assumption comes from that socialists dont want to work. The socialist movements was originally started by the workers. Those people that mined the resources and built the infrastructures, that allowed the capitalists to operate and attain wealth.

The socialist movement was started by workers who didn't want to work anymore. They wanted what the other guy had, and instead of earning that reward, chose, instead, to steal it.

They didn't like the word "theft" so they changed it to "redistribution".

reply to post by beezzer


I would say you have glossed over the industrial revolution and the two world wars that saw millions of working men go to their deaths to protect the interests of the wealthy. Millions of working men died so our countries could prosper, surely the working man deserved to share in this wealth? This was the idea behind the welfare state

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by beezzer

 

I would say you have glossed over the industrial revolution and the two world wars, that saw millions of working men go to their deaths to protect the interests of the wealthy.

Now come on!!! We don't agree on much bud, but that response is weak coming from you! You're going to reduce two world wars and the industrial revolution to THAT?

You're better than that post.

reply to post by beezzer


Im tired, ive been awake for 36 hours. It was a lame response. Remove a star or take my silver boarder

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by beezzer

 

Im tired, ive been awake for 36 hours. It was a lame response. Remove a star or take my silver boarder

I'll let you go with a warning. Though I will have to take a spatula to a tiny kitten as punishment.

In getting my MBA, "organic growth" comes up alot. Meaning that there are a variety of factors that are involved in the production of any given event. Redefining terms to justify actions would fall under that, I do believe.

reply to post by beezzer





Where do you get the idea that socialism is about "redistribution of wealth"? There is nothing wrong with being wealthy or poor. What is wrong is in certain methods of wealth acquisition wherein people are hurt by others who are more aggressive than they are. When some take unethical advantage of others in their pursuit of money people get hurt. It is this which we leftists find repulsive, not the mere possession of wealth.

We see examples of this unbalance all the time. Just look at the business lobbyists in DC and then think about how when common folk would like to have unions as advocates in an attempt to match the political advantages of businesses. Is this wrong of we common folk? Are we supposed to sit idly by and watch big business wield all the power in their favor?

America is a healthy mix of free enterprise and socialism. A healthy society must have elements of both or someone's freedom will be diminished. The reason for this is human nature itself. Humans are ego centric and inclined towards selfishness unless they are guided by laws. This is what "regulation" is for.

Do we want America to be a socialist state? Hell no. That's not the American way. Do we want unfettered, unrestrained capitalism instead? Hell no. The excesses of either are harmful. So what do we want? We want, we should want, exactly what the founders of our country envisioned and that is a tension in governance wherein the left and the right vie in constructive ways often meeting in the middle.

Now tell me again about "redistribution of wealth" and the misconception behind it. Hugo Chavez and other communists have tried it and failed. No one in America wants that. Think and study and get definitions clear. Then begin a debate but it has to be correctly begun based on truth or it is just a big waste of time.

reply to post by trailertrash


This thread is, in part, to the current administrations definition of redistribution of wealth.
While your post has merit in many areas, just taking from someone because they have earned more to benefit those who have not earned more should be seen as repugnant by anyone.

reply to post by beezzer


come on people i know all i do is read and dont contribute much but im a good guy with needs.i just get so depressed when i see all those snfs.even though you earned them i really think we would all be better off if they were mine.sure i spent most of my life partying and not concerned about life other than my own and not really paying attention. i mean wow it would make me so much smarter if i could have your stars.ITS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

Originally posted by deadeyedick
reply to post by beezzer

 

come on people i know all i do is read and dont contribute much but im a good guy with needs.i just get so depressed when i see all those snfs.even though you earned them i really think we would all be better off if they were mine.sure i spent most of my life partying and not concerned about life other than my own and not really paying attention. i mean wow it would make me so much smarter if i could have your stars.ITS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

You get one star from me and if I can, 50 from a giving prog. You sound as if you really deserve them, even if you don't.

reply to post by beezzer


I think the key here is to define the term "earned".

In pretty much every city of the US, there are impound yards where cars are held in what are basically junkyards in low-rent neighborhoods. The owners are usually related in some way to local politicians or law enforcement. Cars impounded for DUIs, tags, anything wind up there and are charged large sums, usually several hundred dollars a day and more on weekends, whether their owners are convicted of anything or not. If the owner can't afford the tow and impound fees their vehicle is sold for profit.

I submit that the owners of the impound yards "earn" nothing at all. What they are doing is legalized theft.

A significant number of other well-to-do to rich people also "earn" nothing, but rather take from others' labors and the wealth that others create.

Goldman-Sachs "earned" nothing. They manipulated markets, defrauded their investors, and blackmailed the Treasury.

Just because someone has a lot of money doesn't mean they "earned" it.

reply to post by apacheman

There are thieves of every stripe. But to accuse someone just because they have more as a justification for legalized theft is plain wrong.